[CLUE-Talk] Fw: Recap of SCO - IBM law suit

[Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier]

On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 10:34, Gary Threlkeld wrote:
> Excerpts -
>  
> How blatant was the code-lifting you discovered?
> When we take a top-tier view of the amount of code showing up inside
> of Linux--we don't necessarily own those flavors, but we have control
> rights over how that information gets disseminated--the amount is
> substantial. We're not talking about just lines of code; we're talking
> about entire programs. We're talking about hundred of thousands of
> lines of code. 

Translation: Code developed by other companies on top of the original
Unix System V code *may have been used* in Linux. 

What SCO is claiming here is:

1. Other companies have developed features on top of Unix System V for
their own proprietary versions of Unix.

2. SCO is claiming that it can decide whether those features can be
ported to other systems.

3. SCO is claiming ownership of the ideas and implementations of other
companies, not just IBM. 

What's important to note:

1. We haven't seen SCO's contract with IBM. If IBM was dumb enough to
sign a contract that gives SCO rights to features developed on top of
Unix, SCO may be able to win damages from IBM. Maybe. It's hard to
imagine a judge allowing SCO to claim derivative works fully developed
by IBM or another party. Particularly when those companies own the
patents. They are not derivative works under traditional copyright law,
but could be under IBM's contract. Unfortunately, the contract hasn't
been made public so it's hard to say. 

2. SCO keeps claiming "hundreds of thousands of lines" but (to the best
of my knowledge) it's claiming rights to code it has never seen -- Has
SCO audited AIX, IRIX and so forth? Because the code they're claiming
does NOT come from the original Unix System V.

> Some open-source defenders have said that there's only one way you can
> write certain functions, so some part of the Unix and Linux code are
> bound to look the same. Do the similarities go beyond that?
> We're talking about line-by-line code copying. That includes not just
> the function but the exact, word-for-word lines of code. And the
> developer comments are exactly, 100 percent the same. The developer
> comments really get to the DNA of the code. It's one thing to have
> something look the same, but when the developer comments are exactly
> the same, that tells you everything you need to know that this is in
> fact lifted, that it has been copied and pasted from Unix into Linux. 

If there is any actual System V code or UnixWare in Linux, SCO has been
very stingy about showing it -- even to analysts who have signed NDAs
with the company.

Further, SCO has provided no evidence -- even to those analysts -- about
the origins of that code, or that the code actually exists in UnixWare
or the original System V code. It's plenty easy to open two text files
in front of an unqualified analyst like Laura DiDio (I have spoken to
her several times, she does not have a strong grasp of technical
issues...) and say "see, these are identical" but where is the proof
that said code existed in UnixWare prior to its existance in Linux?
Where's the proof it was contributed by someone outside of Caldera?

> The perception is that Microsoft basically wants to use this as a
> weapon in its battle against Linux. What's your response?
> The Linux community loves to jump on that bandwagon. There's no truth
> to it... 

Yeah... probably because Microsoft's decicion to fund SCO via licensing
is awfully convenient, especially since Microsoft typically would
litigate rather than pay out if a company were to claim that their IP
had been appropriated by Microsoft.

It's also an odd coincidence that Microsoft decided to change its
licensing terms to "indeminify" their users against third-party IP
claims on March 1. SCO filed suit against IBM on March 6. I'd like to
see the phone records and travel records for SCO and Microsoft execs
leading up to those dates. I'd bet good money that Microsoft and SCO
were in talks before SCO filed suit against IBM.  
 
> To the extent this makes an IT guy think twice about deploying Linux,
> do you have any regrets about that, or do you think you're doing those
> people a favor?
> I believe were doing them a huge favor...

Yeah, what a favor... 

Zonker
-- 
Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier
jzb at dissociatedpress.net
Aim: zonkerjoe
http://www.dissociatedpress.net